I initially wanted the setting to be in Alaska because I thought that would be intriguing but I'm struggling with knowing much about the state. I've only been there once when I was younger but don't remember much about it. I've noticed I'm writing a lot of things in my story that wouldn't be accurate (such as daylight/nighttime, seasonal issues, etc) am struggling with researching all of these little things. Would I be better off just to have the setting be in a different albeit similar state I'm more familiar with? Thank you!!
Well, that really depends on how much research you're willing to get into. I'm not really sure what you mean by daylight/nighttime, seasonal issues, but there are tables online that give sunrise and sunset times. The best way to research would be to make a friend up there and visit. Or at the very least find someone(s) up there whose brain you could pick and use as an accuracy reader once the story is finished.
It there a purpose in setting it in Alaska other than it's "intriguing"? I think where the story is set should have intention beyond that, or you're going to wind up with a sense of randomness (which I suspect your continuity problems are a warning sign of).
What features in the setting are necessary for the plot? Do you have to specify a particular location or could you leave it ambiguous?
To me, the story always comes first, and characters second. The setting is a solid third. So with that in mind, I don't think the state is important. If you have a good reason why it has to be Alaska, then by all means go for it. Research, research, research. But if the story can be set anywhere, I wouldn't worry about the state at all. Rather focus on the story, then find out what state fits the best later.
Well no body (actual person) has been to Mars, but I did use a detailed map for my story, as well as look up detailed information on a chunk of geography that is apart of the story. Point is research is a good thing to utilize. From looking up the area you intend to be writing about, and if possible talking with people who live there or have lived there for a considerable enough time as to not steer you wrong. Alaska is huge, and has all kinds of interesting places to wonder about. It just depends on how general or refined you want your setting to be. Research is your friend, and there is a world out there full of information for you to decide on what you wish to use to keep accuracy for the sake of your story. Good luck and all the best.
If you're not willing to spend a lot of time researching, change it. But do you really need to know these things you don't know? Like, does it play a part in the plot? If not, you can just leave it out. The absence of information isn't always a bad thing.
Writing is difficult enough without complicating it by trying to tell a story about an unfamiliar place. People who live Alaska or who have visited there frequently will know immediately that your story doesn’t ring true. Many, if not most, fiction writers choose familiar locations as settings for their stories and novels. I recommend that you do, too. Don’t make it more difficult. It is hard enough anyway.
You can say this about any setting. If you aren't familiar don't do it. I want to visit Australia/New Zealand one day, but until I did I wouldn't try to write about it.
You know what is the most fun approach to this issue? Okay, it's a bit farfetched but ...why not plan a trip for research purposes? This time you'll know what you're looking for. That might help you to decide. It's not so much that you will make mistakes if your research isn't impeccable (you will) but that a trip there will give you ideas you might not have had otherwise. I'm firmly of the belief that research doesn't limit you. Instead it throws open more possibilities than you could have imagined before.
I have heard that some writers make a point to travel to the places they set their books in. It is a neat idea if you can swing it.
I would ask myself, how much does the environment have to do with my story? If there are a lot of scenes, or events that are weather related I would use Alaska. It is intriguing and unforgiving, which may make for a compelling story. I wrote about a place I've never been, (Haiti) and produced a 90000-word novel out of it. The only problem, and like you said, the research, which took several years for a book that could have been written in a couple of months.
Unless Alaska is a crucial aspect of the story's plot, I wouldn't worry too much about location-specific details until after the story is written and more or less completed. Then I would research for exactly what's needed to fill the holes.
Actually, I would be extremely cautious taking that approach—write first, research later. If you make fundamental setting mistakes, thinking you can just fill in the holes later on, you might end up having to change large portions of your story because it could not have happened the way you originally envisioned it. That could be extremely discouraging. There is a way around this, @ShilohCalais . You can create a fictional town, village, location, etc, within Alaska, for your story's setting. (Check your fictional place names first, to make sure the places don't actually exist.) That gives you a bit of leeway when it comes to physical details, etc, although you'll want to have a realistic picture of the possibilities. (No alligators roaming the forests, etc.) That means you DO have to be superficially clued-up about Alaska, before you start. If you mention any place that actually exists—a town, city, mountain range, river, climatic characteristic or event, etc—I'd be sure to get the accurate research done beforehand, however. Otherwise ...urkkkk.... You are likely to lose the trust of any readership that is actually familiar with Alaska. They'll put you down as somebody who doesn't know what you're talking about.
Sorry, have to disagree. The old saying applies: Write What You Know I would never write about say Africa, like a lot of adventurers want to do, unless I have been there and know what I'm talking about. Now, I may mention that a character is in Africa, and another character is calling him on the phone or something... but I'm not setting the whole book there like some kind of novice.
I don't think we're talking about the same thing. Of course if you write what you already know you don't need to do research! Just write. But if you're writing about something you don't know—like Africa, for you—I maintain that you do need to do your research first. Otherwise you may well write yourself into a corner you can't easily get out of. It doesn't make sense to write a story set in Africa, when you've never been there and don't know much about it, and after you've written it THEN go do your research. You're likely to be facing a major plot re-write.
Uh-oh. I guess that leaves out fantasy and historical fiction pieces. Actually doing the research helped me through some rough patches. When I read about what happened to others in that time-period and/or that place, I thought maybe my character would have had some of the same things happen to them.
Write What You Know, doesn't mean you don't have to do research. It means you should be somewhat familiar with the subject. For instance, can a person that has never even been married write a story about a couple going through a divorce? Yeah, they can, but couldn't other writers who know what it feels like do it better?
That's because I thought you were saying something yourself but actually you were telling another poster not to do it, which I agree with. When these threads get long it's hard to go back and see what people have said in the beginning.
Like I said that would leave out my historical fiction, which is about a nun in Haiti in the 19 century. Unfortunately, I'm an old fart in the 21st. I realize now that Stephen King missed the mark by writing about a demonized girl in Carrie.
Why? You don't think he would know a little something about being in highschool, peer pressures, etc. He just put a twist on it.
Yeah. The thing about Mars is you're not going to run into people who have lived there and can prove you wrong! I agree what you say about the research—especially asking people who know the place themselves—but I also think it's well worth considering a trip. Even if the writer is only there for a few weeks, looking at what is specifically needed for the setting, that will be a huge benefit. It's not necessary, but I reckon it can certainly help. Even the quality of light is different in certain places. The feel of the wind. The smell from what's around you in a particular place. The way people interact with each other. All these little details can add up to more believability for people who DO know the place, and a less generic atmosphere for people who don't.
